Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:16:13 +1200
From:      Craig Carey <snowfall@gmx.co.uk>
To:        freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Cc:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Subject:   Re: Blocking addresses of non-spammers; bug reporting
Message-ID:  <5.2.0.9.2.20030317174305.03f7abc0@213.165.64.20>
In-Reply-To: <3E751697.8B69040E@mindspring.com>
References:  <200303131013.h2DADL386993@flip.jhs.private> <200303131013.h2DADL386993@flip.jhs.private> <5.2.0.9.2.20030316095750.035d3748@213.165.64.20>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03\03\16 16:28 -0800 Sunday, Terry Lambert wrote:
 >Craig Carey wrote:
 >> At 03\03\14 17:05 -0500 Friday, Dan Langille wrote:
 >>  >I've used both the web interface and send-pr.  I have no problem with
 >>  >either.  All my dealings with postmaster@ have been resolved promptly.
 >>
 >> The web interface is disabled as you would know I presume.
 >>
 >> It's confirmable by browsing to here: http://www.freebsd.org/send-pr.html
 >>
...


 >generate email to mailing lists, and so on, and it can be used to
 >generate individual email messages directly, through multiple use
 >of the interface (this is also arguably a bug in the send-pr
 >system when it comes to sending acknowledgement messages to the
 >"original submitter").
 >
 >Basically, it's a web->email gateway, and can be abused as such.
 >

An actual fact of reasoning. Something so material that even if there
was a complete withholding of, arguments could be made that it is wrong,
into the dark, and all parties are satisfied.

---

The message that comes back to me is hard to understand,

Perhaps it could be improved so that there is a suggestion on whether or
not they should sign up with a DNS service provider.


I have this text at my website:

|  "This man has reverted to Heathenism after embracing Islam." Mu'adh said,
|  "I will not dismount till he is killed." Abu Musa replied, "He has been
|  brought for this purpose, so come down." Mu'adh said, "I will not dismount
|  till he is killed." So Abu Musa ordered that he be killed, and he was
|  killed.

 From : http://www.ijs.co.nz/islamic-bible.htm

I am not removing the webpage if FreeBSD insisted. First it has to reverse
the untrue claim that it is not black-hole blocking my e-mail.


 >The reason you have not had a problem with send-pr is that you
 >are not sending from an email address which is authorized to use
 >a mail server that does not match its domain.  In other words,
 >you are not being shut down over legitimate relay.
 >
...
 >There are a *lot* of people in this [dinghy in the Poseidon] boat, and
 >with ISP's trying...


Fairly unquantified there. Just a small fraction is it ?.

I will leave skepticism to others.

Abuse is abuse, right?. That is what "maxed out at 5 lines" FreeBSD and
phone company abuse officials might say.

It is like with my situation: there is a possibility of improvement.

    (1) My problem seems to eb that my requests for reasoning and getting
     trashed
    (2) Existing FreeBSD software running in its hyper-pretext mood.
    (3) The plan is to take no action to disable that mood ?.
    (4) Suppose it teleports (ex Star Trek) over to other software
     items put in there.

It might be the architecture list that would consider that.

----

The complaints from large companies are weak legally. E.g. "you'll
have policies". Facts are missing. A strangely broken sentence and a
strong suggestion that <10 TCP packets took some huge system offline.
I got a sampler of US complaints using local law.

The more innocent the party then the more stupid the complaints since
the senders filter out the reasonable complaints.

Is it FreeBSD policy to give no weight to big companies who might "as a
group" produce legally weak (irrespective of whether legally threatening)
complaints ?. Less morally weak are complaints from ADSL users.

The data about the abuse should be public so that it can be checked
that PC and ADSL users and one person complainers are at least regarded
as more credible.

I am sure that FreeBSD got the weighting wrong.

If there is going to be an estimating of how abusing the abuse of
FreeBSD is, then the postmaster's records have got to be seen to be
believed.



---------------

Now I quote the full document of Mr Jonathan M Bresler. This the official
FreeBSD position.

Also Mr Bresler never alleged that I caused a problem.

That can be seen from below. Mr Bresler is involved in claiming that
the counterattack that is never lifted, actually never even started.

Let me guess: Bressler is a programmer.


__________________________________________________________________________
At 02\10\18 07:29 -0700 Friday, Jonathan M. Bresler wrote:
 >
 >> My e-mail address is research@ijs.c---o.nz.
 >>
 >> If you have a dislike of that e-mail address then I request that
 >> that information (no matter in how bad a shape it is) be provided
 >> to me.
 >
 >  we accept email from your address:
 >
 >bash-2.04# host freebsd.org
 >freebsd.org has address 216.136.204.21
 >freebsd.org mail is handled (pri=10) by mx1.freebsd.org
 >bash-2.04# telnet mx1.freebsd.org 25
 >Trying 216.136.204.125...
 >Connected to mx1.freebsd.org.
 >Escape character is '^]'.
 >220 mx1.FreeBSD.org ESMTP Postfix (Postfix Rules!)
 >helo ijs.co.nz
 >250 mx1.FreeBSD.org
 >mail from: research@ijs.co.nz
 >250 Ok
 >rcpt to: postmaster@freebsd.org
 >250 Ok
 >rcpt to: freebsd-test@freebsd.org
 >250 Ok
 >data
 >354 End data with <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>
 >
 >test sending mail from research@ijs.co.nz
 >to both postmaster@freebsd.org and freebsd-test@freebsd.org
 >
 >.
 >250 Ok: queued as 686DD43E97
 >quit
 >221 Bye
 >Connection closed by foreign host.
 >
 >Oct 18 07:10:05 mx1 postfix/smtpd[57382]: 686DD43E97:
 >client=mx1.freebsd.org[216.136.204.125]
 >Oct 18 07:10:49 mx1 postfix/cleanup[57442]: 686DD43E97:
 >message-id=<20021018141005.686DD43E97@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
 >Oct 18 07:10:49 mx1 postfix/qmgr[57338]: 686DD43E97:
 >from=<research@ijs.co.nz>, size=461, nrcpt=2 (queue active)
 >Oct 18 07:10:50 mx1 postfix/smtp[57488]: 686DD43E97:
 >to=<freebsd-test@freebsd.org>, relay=hub.freebsd.org[216.136.204.18],
 >delay=45, status=sent (250 Ok: queued as 0153937B401)
 >Oct 18 07:10:50 mx1 postfix/smtp[57488]: 686DD43E97:
 >to=<postmaster@freebsd.org>, relay=hub.freebsd.org[216.136.204.18],
 >delay=45, status=sent (250 Ok: queued as 0153937B401)
 >
 >
 >>
 >> The FreeBSD server stopped sending e-mail to my e-mail address on
 >> about 14 Aug 2002 06:51:27 -0000. I was subscribed to
 >> FreeBSD-Questions and that was the date of the last message that
 >> I received.
 >>
 >> The request above is for reasoning and thus unable your records
 >> should have the information of the exact [sic] reasoning that was
 >> used on that date.
 >
 >  we remove addresses that bounce more than ~20 messages in a single
 >  24 hour period.  most likely you were removed from the lists for
 >  that reason.
 >
 >>
 >> You may explain to me if you wish to write to me. Also we may
...
 >> Please put your name in your e-mail address responding to this
 >> e-mail message that I write.
 >
 >  postmaster@freebsd.org is the best way to reach me.  my name is
 >  Jonathan M Bresler
 >
 >>
 >> I do not request a correction to the configuration, i.e to the
 >> blocking.
...


This FreeBSD does not seem to be run on the lines of Ombudsman
Offices, where Official Information is available unless there is
good reason for withholding it.

The New Zealand Official Information Act has a wording like (I shan't
check the quote).

Is there a page saying that FreeBSD has got an openness of
information policy ...

Why not open up a position for the FreeBSD Ombudsman ?.

(Thanks in advance for such a lengthy discussion on that topic.)

The PR person position could be deleted, or renamed.

I recommend that FreeBSD rename the PR position into a position for
an Ombudsman, who has a great interest in lawyer, and facts as they
are. Normally Ombudsman spend the bulk of their time trying to
oppose untrue claims that information is not available.

Probably Mr Terry Lambert would be excellent there.

I switched over to Linux due to the dispute (though I see it is
thinking of delete my personal data). So I don't see a bug
report system. It would be solved with an Office of the FreeBSD Ombudsman.

Maybe the topic will go away.



Craig Carey
New Zealand




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.2.0.9.2.20030317174305.03f7abc0>